Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor A Cooper and Councillor R Ford attended as his substitute.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 10^th October 2021 were approved as a correct record.

(Moved by Councillor Dr S Peaple and seconded by Councillor R Claymore)

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive an update from the Chair

There was no updated from the Chair.

No recommendations from the Committee had been presented to Cabinet since the previous meeting.

(Discussion item)

No Matters had been referred to this Committee by Cabinet or Council since the previous meeting.

(Report of the Leader of the Council)

The Chair welcomed the Leader of the Council and the Head of Regeneration and Growth to the meeting. The Committee received the Report of the Leader of the Council which updated it on the progress of the Future High Streets Fund programme. The Leader highlighted:

·       That the Council had appointed McBains as the lead consultant to the project and work was underway to ensure that the project continued to deliver against the programme timeline.

·       That the College had submitted it’s round 2 funding bid and expected a response in the new year.  Through a separate procurement process the Leader reported that the College had appointed McBains as their lead consultant.

·       A business engagement event was held on 13^th October and a new website had been launched, Transforming Tamworth, where regular updates focussing on regeneration, would be posted.

·       That there had been an increase in building costs across the market and the project plan was under review by McBains.

·       Two new Officer appointments had been made to the project team.

The Committee sought clarification in the following areas:

·       That the engagement activities undertaken had been aimed at current businesses within the town, as opposed to new businesses.

·       The costs associated and who was leading on the various planning applications required.

·       That the appointment of McBains and the recruitment of two new Officers had been achieved within budget.

·       When the costs versus the designs would become available which it was reported was expected would be later in the project and the importance of recognising this in the communication of the project.

·       Whether any divergence in project timelines and requirements to spend funding between the Council part of the project and the College part raised further complications where it was reported that whilst this could add complexity, the Council part of the projects, including the location of the enterprise centre in the Co-op building, could be delivered to its timelines.  

·       What was demand take up at the current enterprise centre and what was take up expected to be in the new area, where it was reported that the current enterprise was at capacity and demand was strong particularly for space for businesses with 5-20 employees.  It was further reported that the project did intend to have synergies with the College.

·       The Principal of the College would not be present at any discussions at the project board if there were any discussions which directly affects the college in terms of the Council’s expenditure, they would not be present.

The Committee noted the Report and thanked the Leader and Officer for the update who then left the meeting.

(Report of the Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Community Safety)

The Chair welcomed the Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Community Safety and the Planning Policy and Delivery Team Leader to the meeting who introduced the Report which informed the Committee on the recommendations that will be put before Cabinet on 2 December 2021 in relation to the spending of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) income and the publication of the Infrastructure Funding Statement.

The Report set out a summary of how the funds were collected, allocated and spent in respect of infrastructure projects. The Report further recommends that the priorities for the strategic spend of CIL be retained as agreed in April 2021.

The Committee sought clarification in the following areas:

·       Whether funds could be used to provide additional electric vehicle charging points in Council owned housing developments, where it was confirmed that the under the strategic element it would be likely to be possible to allocate funds to such projects.

·       Whether the CIL funds accumulated could be allocated to town centre regeneration projects if required, and when reports to allocate such funding would be likely to be presented to Cabinet.   It was reported that whilst these funds would be, in the longer term, finite, consideration would be given to projects proposed to improve any developments.

·       The process for allocating the spend and the involvement of all members in that process, where it was reported that the aim of the funding was to improve developments in the community, and that the allocation of the funds was a matter for other portfolio holders.

·       Whether CIL funds were utilised for long term maintenance requirements, where it was reported that whilst s106 funds were used for that, this was not how CIL funding was planned to be used.

RESOLVED that the following be recommended to Cabinet that:

1.     Cabinet regularly review how to spend the funds accumulated; and

2.     the process for member involvement and the spend of CIL is clarified by the relevant Portfolio Holder.

(Moved by Councillor S Goodall and seconded by Councillor T Clements)

The Committee noted the report and thanked the Portfolio Holder and Officer for their attendance.

(To receive an update on the Dry Recycling Contract)

The Chair welcomed the General Manager of the Joint Waste Service to the Committee to provide an update on the Dry Recycling Contract.  The Chair reported that quarterly updates were agreed following the 27 September meeting of this Committee which followed the call-in of the Cabinet decision and this was the first of those.

The General Manager reminded the Committee of the key drivers for changing the service which included the delivery of higher quality materials, as well as the options which had been considered.  An overview of the work underway to deliver the project was provided including the procurement of the bags, bins and twin pack trucks, as well as developing a communications plan and recruiting and training staff, developing provisional rounds and developing plans for communal properties. It was reported that the project team had been established, orders for five new twin pack vehicles had been placed, an extension for 12 months of the existing vehicle contract had been agreed and a three year disposal contract (with an option to extend for a further three years) had been procured.   

The General Manager highlighted the areas where further input was sought in terms of implementation dates, any changes to the days of rounds following review, the communication plan, bin presentation arrangements and the roll out plan for communal properties.  The General Manager updated the Committee on the steps the project was taking to identify and mitigate risks.

The General Manager reported on the recent visit to Newcastle-under-Lyme which had implemented dual stream recycling, utilising a bag and a bin, which demonstrated, even in challenging weather conditions, that the service was clean, tidy, safe and efficient, with good participation by residents delivery high quality recycling.

The Committee sought clarification in the following areas:

·       Presentation of both the bag and the bin together even when limited content within the bin, where it was reported that this would be preferred operationally, so the bag could be trapped securely inside the bin once collected, and to avoid the requirement for replacement bags.

·       The importance of training to ensure that the bags, once emptied, would be trapped under the lid of the bin to prevent the bag falling to the bottom of the bin, and becoming difficult to retrieve.

·       The implementation plan for communal properties, particularly when co-located with other properties, where it was reported that all communal properties would be visited and assessed and until that point remain on single stream. 

·       Whether there were any UK based suppliers for these bags where it was confirmed that this option had been explored but no UK suppliers had tendered to provide these bags.

·       Whether the new trucks were diesel where it was confirmed that this was the case.  It was reported that the technology in this area was fairly new and the risk of sourcing new electric vehicles would be significant and would involve significant additional infrastructure at the depot.  It was reported that work was starting to explore the possibility for future fleet to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

(Discussion item – link to Forward Plan is attached)

http://democracy.tamworth.gov.uk/mgListPlans.aspx?RPId=120&RD=0&bcr=1

The Committee identified that it would be considering the Castle Curtain Wall report at its January 2022 meeting prior to Cabinet’s decision. It further noted the item on Economic Development Service Workplan.

To receive updates from any Working Groups

The Chair proposed that the outcomes of the Fireworks working group be considered at the January 2022 meeting.

The Chair reported that officers were expecting to provide further details to the Travellers working group in the new year.

Councillor Price reported that he would be inviting working group members to a Facilities for HGV drivers in Tamworth working group.

(Update and discussion on the Infrastructure Safety & Growth Scrutiny Work Plan)

The Chair updated the Committee on the proposed Community Safety Focus Half Day which would take place in February 2022 and to which partners, including the Police and crime Commissioner and representatives of Staffordshire Police, would be invited as well as all councillors. 

The Committee considered the work plan and updated it as follows:

Infrastructure, Safety and Growth Scrutiny Work Plan